Contributions to Industrial-Minerals Research

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Bulletin 2209–E

History and Overview of the U.S. Diatomite 

Mining Industry, with Emphasis on the 

Western United States

Chapter E of
Contributions to Industrial-Minerals Research

James D. Bliss, Phillip R. Moyle, and Keith R. Long, Editors

Bulletin 2209–E

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey 

History and Overview of the U.S. Diatomite 

Mining Industry, with Emphasis on the 

Western United States

By Thomas P. Dolley and Phillip R. Moyle

Chapter E of
U.S. Department of the Interior

Gale A. Norton, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Charles G. Groat, Director

Version 1.0, 2003

This publication is available only online at:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b2209-e/

Text edited by George A. Havach

Layout by Stephen L. Scott

Manuscript approved for publication, July 24, 2003

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication

is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government 
CONTENTS

Abstract 1

Introduction 1

History and Overview of the Diatomite Industry 1

Early Developments of the U.S. Diatomite Industry 2

 Current State of the U.S. Diatomite Industry 2

 The World Diatomite Industry 4

Production and Processing Methods 5

End Uses 5

Conclusions 7

Acknowledgments 7

References Cited 8

Figures

1. Sketch map of the Western United States, showing locations of principal 

 diatomite operations 1

2. Bar charts showing diatomite production in the United States and worldwide, 

 and diatomite consumption by end use over the past 30 years 3

3. Flow diagram showing major steps in mining and processing of diatomite in

 the United States 6

Table

1. Historical statistics for U.S. and worldwide diatomite production 4

III
1

Abstract

The United States is the largest producer and consumer 

of diatomite in the world. In 2001, the United States produced 

about a third of the estimated global production of 1.95 million metric tons (Mt) of diatomite (Dolley, 2003). In any given 

year, the United States accounts for at least 50 percent of all 

the diatomite exported in the world (Roskill, 1994). Seven 

diatomite companies operating in the United States produce 

diatomite in various grades for a range of applications, including filtration, absorbents, fillers, insulation, and cement manufacture. Economic deposits of diatomite within the United 

States depend on variations in the physical and chemical 

properties between and within deposits, potential end uses, and 

proximity to suitable markets. On the basis of historical production figures, estimated U.S. diatomite-production capacity 

is currently about 800,000 metric tons per year (t/yr).

Introduction

In 2001, the United States was the world’s largest producer and consumer of diatomite, producing 644,000 metric 

tons (t), which accounted for about 33 percent of global 

production (table 1). The Western United States (California, 

Nevada, Oregon, and Washington) are the primary source of 

U.S. production of diatomite; the largest single amount comes 

from the marine diatomite deposits of Lompoc, Calif. (fig. 1). 

Within the United States, cumulative production of diatomite 

from all lacustrine deposits combined exceeds production 

from the Lompoc marine deposits. Additional information on 

the characteristics of marine and lacustrine deposits is presented in chapter D of this Bulletin (Moyle and Dolley, 2003). 

Seven diatomite companies operating in the United States 

produce diatomite for a range of applications; major diatomite products are sold in various grades of calcined powders. 

Diatomite continues to be used primarily for filtration (beer, 

cooking oils, wine); other major uses are as absorbents, filler 

applications, and insulation and in cement manufacture. With 

a diatomite production averaging about 350,000 t/yr, China is 

the United States’ main competitor. The statistical data used 

in this chapter were generated by the U.S. Bureau of Mines 

and the U.S. Geological Survey, unless otherwise noted.

History and Overview of the U.S. Diatomite Mining 

Industry, with Emphasis on the Western United 

States

By Thomas P. Dolley and Phillip R. Moyle

Figure 1. Sketch map of the Western United States, showing 

locations of principal diatomite operations.

History and Overview of the Diatomite 

Industry

References to diatomite date back to the “floating bricks” mentioned by the early Greeks and Romans, 

although it is difficult to ascertain whether the references 

 Abstract
2 Contributions to Industrial-Minerals Research

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1900 1905 1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

YEAR

PRODUCTIO

N

IN THOUSANDS OF METRIC TONS

A

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

1900 1905 1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

YEAR

P

R

O

D

U

C

TIO

N

IN TH

O

U

S

AND

S

OF METRIC TONS

Figure 2. Bar charts showing diatomite production in the United States (A) and worldwide (B) and diatomite consumption by end use over 

the past 30 years (C).

B
3

are to pumice or another siliceous material than diatomite. 

Although pumice and other similar materials were evidently 

used in antiquity as lightweight building materials, early 

descriptions of the “floating bricks,” such as their plasticity 

and their forming and burning as opposed to cutting from a 

natural material, indicate diatomite rather than pumice. In 

A.D. 535, the Roman Emperor Justinian I used diatomite 

bricks to lighten the construction of a 30-m-diameter dome 

for the Church of St. Sofia in Constantinople (Maurrasse, 

1978).

In the United States, three main types of diatomite 

deposit are recognized: (1) marine (oceanic) rocks that 

accumulated near continental margins; (2) lacustrine (freshwater) or nonmarine rocks that formed in lakes or marshes; 

and (3) sedimentary rocks in modern lakes, marshes, and 

bogs. An example of the first type are the diatomite deposits of Lompoc, Calif.; other marine diatomite deposits in 

Maryland and Virginia are presently uneconomic. Examples 

of the second type are the diatomite deposits of Idaho 

(uneconomic), Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and eastern 

California. Examples of the third type are diatomaceous 

sedimentary rocks in Florida, New Hampshire, and New 

York that are currently uneconomic (Durham, 1973). (See 

Wallace, 2003, for additional information on the geologic 

setting of diatomite in the Western United States.)

Historical statistics for U.S. and worldwide diatomite 

production are plotted in figures 2A and 2B and listed in 

table 1. U.S. diatomite production peaked in 1997 at 773,000 

t, with apparent consumption (defined as production minus 

exports plus imports) reaching a historical high of 635,000 t. 

Statistics show that U.S. diatomite production started a slow 

rise to modern levels in 1919 at 38,700 t, partly because of 

the buildup to World War II and diatomite’s use by the U.S. 

military for water filtration during that war.

Early Developments of the U.S. Diatomite 

Industry

The first discovery of diatomite in North America was 

by J.W. Bailey in 1839 near West Point, N.Y. Alfred Nobel’s 

invention of dynamite in 1867 spawned the world’s first significant diatomite industry because dynamite and nitroglycerine explosives required significant amounts of diatomite 

as an absorbent and stabilizer, and so operations began to 

flourish. Diatomite was first produced in the United States 

End Uses

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

E

N

D-U

S

E

C

O

N

S

U

M

P

TIO

N

IN THOUS

AND

S

OF METRIC TONS

1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001

YEAR

Filtration Insulation Fillers Absorbents Other uses

EXPLANATION

Figure 2. Continued.

C
4 Contributions to Industrial-Minerals Research

Year U.S.

production Imports Exports Worldwideproduction

1900 3,280 – – – – – –

1901 3,650 – – – – – –

1902 5,140 – – – – – –

1903 8,360 – – – – – –

1904 5,690 – – – – – –

1905 9,960 – – – – – –

1906 7,350 – – – – – –

1907 13,400 – – – – – –

1908 – – – – – – – –

1909 16,900 – – – – – –

1910 – – – – – – – –

1911 14,600 – – – – – –

1912 15,200 – – – – – –

1913 5,970 – – – – 8,050

1914 9,990 – – – – 10,100

1915 4,170 – – – – 2,810

1916 2,470 – – – – 2,710

1917 2,750 – – – – 3,660

1918 2,690 – – – – 2,850

1919 38,700 – – – – 72,500

1920 56,200 – – – – 103,000

1921 50,000 – – – – 89,100

1922 40,600 – – – – 60,800

1923 59,700 – – – – 87,500

1924 57,300 – – – – 82,500

1925 66,300 – – – – 87,400

1926 79,000 – – – – 95,000

1927 86,600 – – – – – –

1928 86,600 – – – – – –

1929 86,600 – – – – – –

1930 75,100 – – – – – –

1931 75,100 – – – – – –

1932 75,100 – – – – – –

1933 73,900 – – – – – –

1934 73,900 – – – – – –

1935 73,900 – – – – – –

1936 84,600 – – – – – –

1937 84,600 – – – – – –

1938 84,600 – – – – – –

1939 109,000 – – – – – –

1940 109,000 – – – – – –

1941 109,000 – – – – – –

1942 159,000 – – – – – –

1943 159,000 – – – – – –

1944 159,000 – – – – – –

1945 194,000 – – – – – –

1946 194,000 – – – – – –

1947 194,000 – – – – – –

1948 219,000 – – – – 435,000

1949 219,000 – – – – 435,000

1950 219,000 – – – – 517,000

1952 275,000 – – – – 599,000

1953 275,000 – – – – 576,000

1954 351,000 – – – – 658,000

1955 351,000 – – – – 694,000

1956 351,000 – – – – 689,000

1957 408,000 – – – – 853,000

1958 408,000 – – 54,400 1,220,000

1959 408,000 – – 64,400 1,340,000

1960 437,000 – – 83,500 1,410,000

1961 437,000 – – 86,200 1,490,000

1962 437,000 – – 98,900 1,510,000

1963 526,000 – – 102,000 1,380,000

Year U.S.

production Imports Exports Worldwideproduction

1964 526,000 519 116,000 1,450,000

1965 526,000 160 103,000 1,490,000

1966 569,000 0 131,000 1,520,000

1967 569,000 140 134,000 1,570,000

1968 569,000 120 149,000 1,620,000

1969 543,000 43 160,000 1,600,000

1970 542,000 439 140,000 1,590,000

1971 486,000 120 129,000 1,550,000

1972 523,000 57 134,000 1,570,000

1973 552,000 149 161,000 1,630,000

1974 603,000 3,350 169,000 1,710,000

1975 520,000 3,480 133,000 1,670,000

1976 572,000 4,680 135,000 1,430,000

1977 588,000 591 138,000 1,470,000

1978 591,000 181 139,000 1,460,000

1979 650,000 479 154,000 1,510,000

1980 625,000 268 157,000 1,520,000

1981 623,000 349 147,000 1,690,000

1982 556,000 229 128,000 1,720,000

1983 562,000 314 132,000 1,700,000

1984 569,000 307 115,000 1,750,000

1985 576,000 4,490 109,000 1,840,000

1986 570,000 711 119,000 1,840,000

1987 596,000 6,030 126,000 1,610,000

1988 629,000 2,720 147,000 1,670,000

1989 617,000 838 137,000 1,660,000

1990 631,000 689 144,000 1,680,000

1991 610,000 436 152,000 1,600,000

1992 595,000 – – 163,000 1,350,000

1993 599,000 – – 165,000 1,390,000

1994 613,000 379 157,000 2,020,000

1995 722,000 259 144,000 1,990,000

1996 729,000 1,550 143,000 1,990,000

1997 773,000 2,040 140,000 2,010,000

1998 725,000 816 138,000 1,980,000

1999 747,000 387 123,000 2,030,000

2000 677,000 529 131,000 2,030,000

2001 644,000 1,990 148,000 1,950,000

Table 1. Historical statistics for U.S. and worldwide diatomite production.

[Data from U.S. Bureau of Mines/U.S. Geological Survey “Minerals Yearbook” (MYB), 1932–94 and 1995–2000, and its predecessor, “Mineral Resources 

of the United States” (MR), 1900–23 and 1924–31, and “Mineral Commodity Summaries” (MCS), 1978–95, 1996, and 1997–2002; blanks, data unavailable 

or proprietary. U.S. production data for years 1900–21 from MR and MYB: for years 1900–12, summed weights of infusorial earth (diatomite) and tripoli 

produced within the United States; for years 1908 and 1912, proprietary; for years 1915–18, incomplete because many data were proprietary. Imports: for 

years 1946–63, proprietary; for years 1964–2000, from MYB. Exports: for years 1946–57, proprietary; for years 1958–2000, from MYB. Worldwide production 

data for years 1913–26 and 1948–2000 from MR and MYB]

in 1884 from a deposit in Maryland; small-scale commercial development of diatomite also occurred in California in 

1889 (Cummins, 1975; Dolley, 2002).

By 1900, uses for diatomite had expanded to include 

building materials, polishing compounds, filtration, filler 

material in rubber, paint, roofing, and paper—a prelude to 

its worldwide use in the 20th century. In 1900, the first U.S. 

patent was issued for the use of diatomite in beer filtration, 

one of diatomite’s primary applications in modern times. In 

1900, U.S. diatomite production was about 3,300 t. During 

the 1920s, the development of processing techniques (such 

as calcination, flux calcination, and grade and sizing tech-
End Uses 5

nologies) enabled diatomite to be used in various market 

applications and end uses. The use of diatomite for beer and 

wine filtration became more widespread after the repeal of 

Prohibition in 1933; previously, breweries utilized a woodpulp filtration process (Cummins, 1973).

The growth of the U.S. diatomite industry approximately paralleled the rise of industrialization in the United 

States. The industry grew gradually during the 1920s; however, significant changes took place during World War II. 

Just before that war, the industry was dominated by Johns 

Manville Corp. and Dicalite Corp. at their operations in California and Nevada; both of these companies were planning 

an expansion of their operations before World War II.

The primary consumers of diatomite during World War 

II were the U.S. Army (as a lightweight material for water 

purification) and the U.S. Navy (for water purification, 

removal of oil from boiler and engine water, and low-lightreflectance paints for ships). Production increased during 

the war, but shortfalls occurred at Lompoc in spring 1945, 

owing to a lack of skilled labor and spare parts for machinery. At one point, military personnel provided labor from a 

nearby U.S. Army base. Additionally, an attempt was made 

to use German prisoners of war at the minesite, but this plan 

failed (Gitter, 1945).

Post-World War II economic growth resulted in production-capacity increases to accommodate emerging diatomite 

markets, a trend that continued into the 1960s and 1970s. 

This period also featured an increase in corporate consolidation, resulting in a mature and modern diatomite industry 

(Cummins, 1973).

The economic recession of 1982 severely affected 

global diatomite consumption, resulting in U.S. production declines in the early 1980s. During this period, U.S. 

diatomite exports first felt the negative impact of emerging 

regional diatomite producers and their intrusion into foreign 

markets, particularly in the circum-Pacific region. Production amounts did not recover to pre-1980 levels until 1990. 

Additionally, by the mid-1980s, the U.S. diatomite industry 

had a 25-percent production overcapacity (Miles, 1987). 

U.S. production-capacity increases in the 1990s fell far short 

of those that occurred immediately after World War II.

Current State of the U.S. Diatomite 

Industry

As of 2001, the U.S. diatomite industry is dominated 

by three major producers: Celite Corp. (Lompoc, Calif., and 

Quincy, Wash.); Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. (Lovelock and 

Fernley, Nev., and Vale, Oreg.); and Grefco Minerals, Inc. 

(Mina, Nev.). California is the leading diatomite-producing State, followed by Nevada; together, these two States 

accounted for about 86 percent of total U.S. production in 

2001 (Dolley, 2003). On the basis of historical production 

figures, estimated U.S. diatomite production-capacity is currently about 800,000 t/yr.

The World Diatomite Industry

World diatomite-production data for the years 1913–26 

and 1948–2001 are plotted in figure 2B and listed in table 1. 

The United States is the world’s largest diatomite producer, 

and the growth of the global industry can be said to parallel 

developments in the United States. Worldwide diatomite production peaked in 1999 and 2000 at slightly more than 2 Mt 

and in 2001 was about 1.95 Mt. Major diatomite producers 

in 2001 were the United States, accounting for 33 percent of 

worldwide production, followed by China (18 percent), Japan 

(10 percent), Denmark (approx. 9 percent, all moler products, 

which contain 30 weight percent clay), Mexico (5 percent), 

and some former Soviet Union countries (approx 4 percent) 

(Dolley, 2003). In any given year, the United States accounts 

for at least 50 percent of all diatomite exported in the world 

(Roskill, 1994). Increasing diatomite-production capacity and 

industry development in certain Pacific Rim nations could 

negatively affect U.S. overseas markets in the future.

Production and Processing Methods

Several companies mine and process diatomite by using 

various techniques at many different locations in the Western 

United States (fig. 1). The flow diagram shown in figure 3 

demonstrates the major steps common to most mining and 

processing of diatomite. Recovery of diatomite from most 

U.S. deposits is by low-cost open-pit mining because many 

occurrences are at or near the surface. To remove overburden 

and excavate ore, different combinations of rippers, dozers, 

scrapers, front-end loaders, power shovels, and dump trucks 

are used. Outside the United States, however, underground 

mining is fairly common (such as in Chile, China, and 

France), owing to deposit form, depth, topography, and other 

physiographic constraints. Room-and-pillar methods generally are used, commonly with equipment similar to that used 

in open pits, but the smallest mines are excavated with hand 

tools. Explosives are not normally needed at surface or underground mines because of the softness and friability of the ore. 

In Iceland, dredging is used to recover diatomaceous mud 

from the bottom of Lake Myvatn. As weather permits, the ore 

is stockpiled in the open air to segregate it by grade and to 

reduce the normally high moisture content before delivering it 

to the processing facility (Dolley, 2002).

Diatomite processing is commonly done near the mine 

to reduce the cost of hauling mine-run rock, which may 

contain as much as 65 weight percent water, but the cost of 

delivering energy (electric power and fuel) to the site also 

is a consideration. Processing typically involves a series of 

crushing, drying, size-reduction, and calcining steps, and 

heated air is used for conveying and classifying within the 

plant. Commonly, spiked rolls and hammer mills are used 

for primary crushing to a size of 1.25 cm (0.5 in.), because 

they limit damage to the diatom structure. With the heated 

air and multiple passes through special “milling” fans and 
6 Contributions to Industrial-Minerals Research

Stockpile

Classifier

#1

Cyclone

Secondary

separator

Delumper

Primary

separator

Tertiary

separator

#3

Cyclone

#2

Cyclone

Exhaust/waste

air

Gas, oil,

Waste

Primary

separator

Secondary

separator

Blower

Main product storage

Baghouse product

packing unit

Main product

packing unit

Baghouse

Warehouse,

shipping

Kiln

(Calcining)

Transport

Mine

(Rip, doze, and load)

Ore

(calcining)

Kiln

Figure 3. Flow diagram showing major steps in mining and processing of diatomite in the United States.
 Conclusions 7

air cyclones, further drying, size reduction, and classifying 

are accomplished. The cyclones not only classify for size but 

also remove undesirable components in the raw feed on the 

basis of density differences. The goal of size reduction is to 

separate individual frustules (one of a diatom’s two valves) 

without destroying their delicate structure. Diatom structure 

is the single most important factor in filtration. In the later 

stages of processing, calcining is normally done in rotary 

kilns. Plant operators take special precautions to mitigate any 

health hazards from free crystalline silica in mining areas 

(Dolley, 2002).

Production-cost allocations were reported for the United 

States in 1983 as mining (10 percent), processing (60 percent), and packing and shipping (30 percent). A 1990 report 

stated that energy costs ranged from 25 to 30 percent of direct 

costs (in Breese, 1994, p. 405). The proportion of the product 

that is calcined directly affects energy consumption.

Commercial diatomite products are offered in a great 

variety of grades. Principal factors are the size, shape, overall 

arrangement and proportions of the various types of frustule 

(factors that affect filtration rate, product clarity, and absorption capacity), and the contents of silica and impurities, such 

as certain minerals and chemicals (especially iron, a major 

impurity), clay, sand, and organic matter. Several additional 

specifications are made for certain applications, such as 

brightness/whiteness and abrasive hardness. Reduction in the 

content of free crystalline silica, though normally low, is also 

required by some environmental regulations, particularly for 

calcined products. A major influence on the deposit grade is 

the extent of processing within three broad classifications: 

naturally milled and dried; plain (“straight”) calcined (to 

1,000°C); and flux calcined (to 1,200°C with the addition 

of as much as 10 weight percent sodium compounds, such 

as soda ash, salt, or sodium hydroxide). Calcining removes 

organic matter, increases filtration rate (surface area is 

reduced by fusing more delicate structures of particles and 

sintering them into small clusters, resulting in larger particle 

size and increased pore size), oxidizes iron (changing the buff 

to gray colors common in crude ore feed to pink or white), 

increases specific gravity, and increases particle hardness but 

also produces free silica. The flux-calcining process produces 

a filter product characterized by faster flow rates. In flux calcining, a fluxing agent, such as soda ash, is added to the kiln 

feed to increase particle sintering and thus increase particle 

size. Flux calcining modifies the physical structure of frustules and converts iron oxides to a clear glassy phase to produce a range of white filter-grade product. Most filter grades 

are calcined (Dolley, 2002).

End Uses

Commercial diatomite products are fine-size, irregular 

porous noncaking particles with a large surface area and high 

liquid-absorption capacity. They are relatively inert chemically, have a low refractive index, are mildly abrasive, have a 

low thermal conductivity with a reasonably high fusion point, 

can be slightly pozzolanic (chemically resistant and superiorstrength cements), are very high in silica, and can be produced 

and delivered at a cost consistent with customer applications. 

Sawn shapes, which have long been used as lightweight building material (especially in China) and for primarily thermal 

insulation (especially the high-clay-content Danish moler), 

continue to account for a significant part of worldwide diatomite production. Dried natural products and calcined products 

are used in the above-mentioned applications. Particulate products are more widely used and can be tailored to fit desired 

uses by blending various grades of calcined and natural material. Fines, especially from baghouses used to remove particulates from the cyclone discharge waste or recycle air, are used 

mostly for filler-grade products, and the coarser bottom-discharge particles are used for filter grades.

The most important use of diatomite, in a great variety 

of grades, is as a filtration medium for beverages (especially beer and wine), sugar and sweetener liquors, oils and 

fats, petroleum and chemical processing (including waste 

drycleaning fluids), pharmaceuticals, and water (potable, 

industrial process, waste, and swimming pool). A large 

and growing application is diatomite’s use as an absorbent 

for industrial spills (oil and toxic liquids) and for pet litter. 

Another important broad category of use is as a filler, commonly serving a dual purpose, such as an extender and flatting agent in granular materials, a multieffect component in 

plastics (including the prevention of films from sticking), and 

an extender/absorbent carrier for dry pesticides, pharmaceuticals, catalysts, and other chemicals. Other significant uses are 

as an insulation material in bulk (loose) and in molded forms, 

in other insulation products that include calcium silicate as 

a component, and as a silica additive in various compounds, 

including mortar and portland cement, where it is also used 

for its pozzolanic properties. Emerging markets for diatomite 

include use in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals and as a 

nontoxic insecticide (Crossley, 2000, p. 135). In 2001, the 

percentage of U.S. diatomite production by end use was as 

follows: filtration, 69 percent; absorbents, 14 percent; fillers, 

11 percent; insulation, 3 percent; and other (cement production and unspecified uses), 3 percent. Trends in U.S. diatomite 

end-use consumption from 1971 to 2001 are plotted in figure 

2C (Dolley, 2003).

Conclusions

The U.S. diatomite industry appears to be mature and 

generally stable at the beginning of the 21st century. Increasing energy costs and possible global production overcapacity may represent impediments to future expansion. The 

past encroachments into filter applications of diatomite by 

more advanced technology (ceramic, polymeric, and carbon 

membranes) apparently are not of major concern to producers, possibly because of cost factors. Disposal of diatomite 

waste, however, is a problem not fully resolved by recycling. 

The problem of free crystalline silica associated with diatomite, particularly when calcined, continues to be of concern 

(Dolley, 2002).
8 Contributions to Industrial-Minerals Research

Acknowledgments

Thomas Kelly of the U.S. Geological Survey compiled 

most of the historical diatomite statistics. Map and flow diagrams were provided by Brian Jaskula and Robert Callaghan, 

respectively, of the U.S. Geological Survey.

References Cited

Breese, O.Y., 1994, Diatomite, in Carr, D.D., editor, Industrial minerals 

and rocks (6th ed.): New York, American Institute of Mining, 

Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, p. 397–412.

Crossley, Penny, 2000, Clarifying matters—world diatomite reviewed: 

Industrial Minerals, no. 390, p. 119–141.

Cummins, A.B., 1973, Johns Manville and the history of Celite diatomite: Denver, Colo., Johns-Manville Products Corp., 598 p.

———1975, Terra diatomacea: Denver, Colo., Johns-Manville Products Corp., 262 p.

Dolley, T.P., 2003, Diatomite: U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Industry 

Surveys, June, 6 p.

———2002, Diatomite, in Metals and minerals: U.S. Geological 

Survey Minerals Yearbook 2000, v. 1, p. 25.1–25.6.

Durham, D.L., 1973, Diatomite, in Brobst, D.A., and Pratt, W.P., eds., 

United States mineral resources: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 820, p. 191–195.

Gitter, A.J., 1945, History of diatomaceous earth and related Government policies under the War Production Board and predecessor agencies, May 1940–October 1945: Washington D.C., War 

Production Board, Miscellaneous Minerals Division, Nonmetals Section, Clay-Talc Unit, 24 p.

Maurrasse, Florentin, 1978, Diatomite, in Fairbridge, R.W., and 

Bougeois, Joanne, eds., The encyclopedia of sedimentology: Stroudsburg, Pa., Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, p. 

263–266.

Miles, W.J., 1987, Economics of diatomite in the 1980’s: Society of 

Mining Engineers Preprint 87–123, 14 p.

Moyle, P.R., and Dolley, T.P., 2003, With or without salt—a comparison 

of marine and continental-lacustrine diatomite deposits: U.S. 

Geological Survey Bulletin 2209–D, 11 p.

Roskill Information Services Ltd., 1994, The economics of diatomite 

(7th ed.): London, 146 p.

Wallace, A.R., 2003, Regional geologic setting of Late Cenozoic lacustrine diatomite deposits, Great Basin and surrounding region; 

overview and plans for investigation: U.S. Geological Survey 

Bulletin 2209–B, 12 p. [URL http://geopubs.wr.usgs.gov/

bulletin/b2209/b2209b.pdf].